To stick with the dam analogy, I think we must define potential for what? Like a dam, each community has potential for many things – irrigation, water supply, hydro – and disaster if the wall breaks re: Sichuan.

Having lived in country where the economy was underpinned with man-made dams (is that sexist?), the usual report, and ongoing anxiety, is % full. That brings us back to your concepts of capacity and our pre-investment decision. If we planned for lesser capacity, when we are full we have to let the water out, and that must be planned. Again, big much talked about decision because of the effect downstream. And maximum capacity cannot be a matter of wishful thinking: catchment area, gorge, basin, wall, water agreements, cost and expected ROI.

And Tribal IQ probably includes the idea that we should all cross the line together. There is bound to be some collective agreement and commitment in there somewhere.

This is turning out to be a productive conversation and you started it! HW rules!

fn( x, y, z) = J units of amplification.

Then we can model and compare. (Similar to Goole’s PR, you would pay for that right?)

This would then lead us to think about the other parts of the story… How would you measure potential? You might never see it or you might get a trickle or even a torrent.

The tribal IQ. (Is that a multiplication? add two IQs of 150? or do we get more? Or do we get the slowest ship in the convoy?)

Someone needs to tell me why I would enjoy Facebook though. I take one look and run!